Sq 



c 







9r 






ANNEXATION OF THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS. 




I stand for national progress, national development, and 
national growth. 


SPEECH 



OF 

/ 



HON. WILLIAM SULZER, 



OF NEW YORK, 



IN THE 



HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 



Tuesday, June 14, 1898. 



\YASI-IIN"GTO^ . 
1898. 






* 



G8622 



V 



f 






SPEECH 

OF 

HON. WILLIAM SULZER 



The House having: under consideration the joint resolution (H. Re3. 259) to 
provide for annexing the Hawaiian Islands to the United States- 
Mr. SULZER said: 

Mr. Speaker: Let mo say at the very beginning of my remarks 
that it is a matter of great personal regret to me that from sincere 
convictions I am compelled to differ on this momentous question 
of the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands with some of my Demo- 
cratic colleagues for whose judgment and opinions I have great 
respect. I had indulged the hope that on this question wo would 
stand as a unit in favor of the policy of annexation. 

At the same time I desire to say that it is a matter of great per- 
sonal gratification to me that at last the important question of 
annexing the Sandwich Islands is before the House of Representa- 
tives for final determination; that at last something is going to be 
done about this very important matter; that at last the people 
will be heard on this question through their representatives in 
this House. 

The question of the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands is on© 
in which I take a very deep interest, and I have given some study 
and some thought to the matter. For many years I have been a 
consistent and an ardent advocate of the annexation of these 
Pacific islands. They should have been annexed long ago. There 
is no good reason why they should not be annexed now. And I 
congratulate this House and the country upon the fact that they 
soon will be annexed, forever to remain under the American flag. 
Mr. Speaker I favor these resolutions and shall vote for them 
with all my heart, because I believe, after careful investigation, 

that the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands to this country at 
3478 3 



this time is essential, both from a military and a commercial stand- 
point, to our supremacy on the Pacific Ocean. In my judgment, 
the Hawaiian Islands are the key to the Pacific and are, and of 
right ought to be, a part of the sovereign territory of the United 
States. Their acquisition is absolutely necessary for the protec- 
tion of our great Pacific coast line. 

In this respect they constitute the sentinel of the North Pacific, 
and to us a Gibraltar indispensable for the protection of our Pacific 
coast. All our great naval and military authorities say this, and 
there can be no doubt about it in the opinion of airy person who 
will give the question investigation and due consideration. Our 
possession of these islands will give us a strategical position in 
the Pacific that will always be an incomparable advantage in case 
of trouble. It is well known that the Pacific is so wide that war 
vessels can not cross it from any foreign naval station to our 
shores without recoaling, and there is no place to recoal in all the 
Pacific but Hawaii. The exclusion of foreign countries from 
Hawaii will practically protect our Pacific coast from trans-Pacific 
attack. And no less an authority than Captain Mahan has said 
that the possession of these islands by the United States is a mili- 
tary necessity; that no greater navy would be needed for the de- 
fense of our Pacific coast than would be required with the islands 
unannexed, and with them annexed the advantage would be en- 
tirely with us. This opinion is concurred in, I believe, by all 
our naval and military authorities. 

To-day we are confronted with this situation: The people of 
the Hawaiian Islands through their duly elected officers petition 
ns for annexation. They have a little Republic away out there on 
the Pacific, and they believe they should become, and they want 
to become, a part of the great Republic of the United States. 
They ask us to take them under the protection of the Stars and 
Stripes. They give us everything. Shall we accept the magnifi- 
cent gift they offer or shall we refuse it? Looking at this question 
from every standpoint, I say for one we should accept. Why 
should we hesitate? Why should we not welcome them to the 
protection of the great Republic? 

If we accept them, there is no nation on earth that can or will 
object. If we refuse to accept this paradise of the Pacific, then, 

347S 



in my judgment, we are morally precluded in the future from ob- 
jecting to any other power accepting them and annexing them. 
We should annex them now or never. We should annex them 
now or be manly enough to declare to all the world that we have 
no interest in them and do not want them. We should not adopt 
the policy of the dog in the manger. I feel confident that if we 
refuse now to take them, that if we spurn their generous offer, 
some other nation will not be so blind to the many advantages of 
the situation; and if some other nation should annex them after 
our refusal, the complications that would be sure to arise sooner 
or later would no doubt lead to trouble. 

We should take them now when there will be no trouble. We , 
should take them now while everything is propitious. We should 
take them now because we need them in our military operations 
in the Pacific, and because we shall need them forever in the fu- 
ture for the protection of our coasts and our interests in the Pa- 
cific. 

A few moments ago I called your attention to the testimony of 
Captain Mahan, our greatest naval authority. Let me now cite 
you a great military authority. I refer to Gen. John M. Schofield. 
He has recently said over his own signature that for years he has 
regarded the annexation of these islands for military and naval 
purposes a public necessity, and he says that not to annex the 
islands now, when we have the opportunity, would be a blunder 
worse than a crime. 

All the military and naval authorities in this country are of the 
same opinion and have always been in accord on this subject. To 
my mind it seems apparent that we must accept these island as a 
protection, from a naval and military standpoint, to our Pacific 
coast. We must hold and govern them for our own preservation. 
No halfway measure will suffice. This Government must take 
these islands or else some other great nation will do it. 

Besides the great advantages of these rich and beautiful islands 

from a naval and military point of view, I favor their annexation 

to this country because I believe the time is at hand when the 

great and growing commercial interests of this country in the 

Orient demand it. [Applause.] 

We are a great commercial country. Our commerce is grow- 
3178 



6 

ing, and must continue to grow, if we would be prosperous. I 
want to see -this country the greatest commercial nation on earth. 
If we are wise, if we take advantage of opportunity, I doubt not 
we soon shall be. I will always do all in my power to foster, to 
build up, to develop, and to extend our commercial industries. 
To do otherwise would be shortsighted and unpatriotic. The 
commerce of a nation makes it rich and great. Asia and Africa 
and the East Indies are being opened up and developed to-day, and 
we must look to the Orient and get our share of its trade and com- 
merce. We know to-day that we can not successfully compete 
with England, France, and Germany in the manufacture of many 
goods that are sold in Europe. 

They have the markets there, and they hold the markets there. 
They are great manufacturing countries, and they can manufac- 
ture materials just as cheap if not cheaper than we can. They 
pay, as a general thing, less wages than we do, and their work- 
men and artisans labor more hours a day. We, too, are a great 
manufacturing country. We must find a market for our surplus 
goods. What we can not sell in Europe we must find a market 
for in Central and South America, in Asia and Africa, in the East 
Indies and the South Seas. Here is a new outlet and a great mar- 
ket. There is no doubt our merchants are aware of it and alive 
to its great advantages and rich opportunities. On account of 
time, distance, and the cheapness of transportation, the advan- 
tages are all with us for profitable trade and commerce in the Pa- 
cific. 

Let me say to the business men of America, Look to the land of 
the setting sun, look to the Pacific! There are teeming millions 
there who will ere long want to be fed and clothed the same as 
we are. There is the great market that the continental powers 
are to-day struggling for. We must not be distanced in the race 
for the commerce of the world. In my judgment, during the next 
hundred years the great volume of trade and commerce, so far as 
this country is concerned, will not be eastward, but will be west- 
ward; will not be across the Atlantic, but will be across the 
broad Pacific. The Hawaiian Islands will be the key that will 
unlock to us the commerce of the Orient, and in a commercial 
sense make us rich and prosperous. 

3478 



Mr. GAINES. Will the gentleman permit a question? 

Mr. SULZER. Certainly. 

Mr. GAINES. Does the gentleman say that this country can 
not compete with Europe in manufactures? 

Mr. SULZER. I say in the manufacturing of many things from 
raw materials this country can not successfully compete with 
England, France, and Germany in the trade and commerce of 
Europe. There are many reasons for this, but I will only mention 
the difference in price of labor and transportation. These coun- 
tries can manufacture and sell their goods cheaper in Europe than 
we can. The statistics, I think, will conclusively prove this; and 
hence I say we must get our share of the trade in the Orient. 

If we do not, the balance of trade will each year be against ns. 
If we increase our trade in the Pacific, business will increase here, 
new and more industries will spring up and grow, the idle labor 
of the land will find ready and remunerative employment, mora 
men will be employed, more and higher wages will be paid, and the 
whole country will be more prosperous. In the great struggle now 
going on among the leading nations of the world for the markets 
and the commerce of the millions beyond the Pacific we must take 
the lead; we must not lag behind. [Applause.] The Hawaiian Is- 
lands are essential to our commercial supremacy in the Pacific. I 
believe every far-seeing business man in this country who will 
give a little time and study to this question will concur in this 
conclusion. 

The Hawaiian Islands are not alone of great strategic advantage 
to us from a naval and military point of view in case of hostili- 
ties, but I believe they are of immense importance to us commer- 
cially, and will become more and more so every year. For us to 
refuse to annex them now would, in my judgment, be a grave 
political blunder, a mistake that might vex us sorely in the future; 
one that we may never be able to rectify without a terrible and 
devastating war. 

It has been said on this floor several times that if we annex 
these islands it will mean an increase in the Navy. Against that 
bare assertion I place the testimony of the greatest naval and 
military authorities in the country. They all agree that the pos- 
session of these islands will not require an increase of the Navy. 
3478 



8 

They all say that with the expenditure of a small amount of 
money comparatively these islands could be so fortified that the 
combined fleets of the world could not take them. That they 
would be a very bulwark of defense to us for the protection of 
our Pacific coast in time of war, and that as a safe place of refuge 
and of supplies for our merchant marine and our ships of war in 
times of danger their value and position can not be overestimated. 

But, sir, even if the annexation of these islands required a larger 
Navy, I would still cast my vote for annexation. I believe in the 
Navy. Ever since I have been in Congress I have advocated and 
voted for all measures in the interest of the Navy. In my opin- 
ion, we want, and must have, a navy that will be large enough 
to protect our shores at home and our citizens and our interests 
in every foreign land. [Applause.] Who is there here to-day 
who will belittle our Navy? We are proud of it, proud of its past, 
and we have every reason to believe we will be proud of its future. 
We need a strong navy. We ought to have as good a navy as 
any nation in the world. We must build up our merchant marine. 
We must carry American goods in American ships and under the 
American flag. There was a day when the sails of our ships were 
seen on every ocean and our flag in every harbor of the world. 
That day will come again, and the policy we contemplate to-day 
will hasten it. 

There is another reason why I favor the annexation of the 
Hawaiian Islauds. The day, in my judgment, sir, is not far dis- 
tant when this Government must build the Nicaragua Canal. 
That will shorten the distance to the Pacific possessions more 
than one-third. The trip of the Oregon has demonstrated that the 
canal across the Isthmus must be built as quickly as possible. It 
should have been built long ago. We must build it with our own 
money, we must own it ourselves, and we must hold it and 
manage it ourselves. 

There is no work to-day more important for the Government to 
do. From all the information I can get I believe the canal can be 
built in less than two years, and that it will not cost $100,000,000. 
It would be one of the greatest things the Government ever did, 
and would pay for itself in less than twenty years. The Nicara- 
gua Canal must be built, should be the watchword of the Amer- 

3473 



ican people from now until it is completed and in successful op- 
eration. If we build the canal across the Isthmus, we must own 
the Hawaiian Islands. The latter is essential to the former. 
When we accomplish these two things, I feel confident that a 
great step will have been taken to protect our coast, promote our 
commerce, and increase our prosperity. 

Mr. Speaker, the question of the annexation of the Hawaiian 
Islands is not a new one. For more than half a century it has 
been considered and advocated by the leading statesmen and the 
ablest thinkers in our country. Years and years ago it was seen 
that sooner or later the islands would come to us and would be 
ours. All our history teaches this. A few years ago, when the 
monarchy died and the Republic of Hawaii reared its head among 
the nations of the world, all farseeing men knew it was only a 
question of a little while when she would come to us and ask us 
to make her a part of our domain. The time is at hand and we 
intend to grant her request. We'know. and the people out there 
know, that a little state like Hawaii can not stand alone among 
her great competitors, all of whom covet her incomparable har- 
bor, her rich and fertile lands, her salubrious climate, her com- 
mercial position and resources, and her invaluable natural stra- 
tegical advantages. She must have the protection of this country 
or some other great power. So she comes to us in her helpless- 
ness and we gladly bid her welcome. 

Another thing, sir, I desire to say at "this time; and that is that 
this question is not a party question. It never was a party ques- 
tion, and it never ought to be made a party question. There 
should be no politics in it. It is a question of American states- 
manship and American patriotism; nothing more, nothing less. 
If it can be made a party question at all, it is a Democratic one. 
The first man in this country to favor Hawaiian annexation, 
years and years ago, was that great Democrat from the State of 
New York, William L. Marcy, the greatest Secretary of State 
this country has ever had since the days of Thomas Jefferson. 
He saw the advantages of our acquiring these islands away back 
in the early days of the Republic. And since his day every Demo- 
cratic Administration save one has done all it could to bring these 
islands under the sovereignty of this country. 

3478 



10 

Let me say to my Democratic colleagues on this side of the 
House that the policy of annexation has been good Democratic 
doctrine ever since this Government was founded. Every bit of 
territory, save Alaska, which has been annexed to this country 
since England recognized our independence has been annexed un- 
der and by virtue of a Democratic Administration. For years and 
years every leader in the Democratic party has been in favor of 
acquiring the Hawaiian Islands. The Democratic party, as a 
party, has never been opposed to it, and as I said before, I regret 
that to-day we are not a unit in favor of these resolutions. In 
my judgment, we ought to be. From the press and from the peo- 
ple all over this country, there comes to this House a cry to-day in 
favor of the annexation of those islands. Public opinion and pub- 
lic sentiment all over the country seem to be all one way. 

Mr. GAINES. Why, then, when the Democrats had control of 
this House and the Senate, did they not pass this measure? 

Mr. SULZER. Ask them; do not ask me. I was not a member 
then. 

Mr. GAINES. You are making a declaration that Democrats 
have always favored the policy of annexation. 

Mr. SULZER. Yes; in the past all but a few. One Democratic 
Executive was opposed to Hawaii, He hauled down the Ameri- 
can flag on those islands. He tried to restore the monarchy and 
came very near succeeding. I am glad he failed. I believed then, 
and I believe now, that his action in this case was the most un- 
wise, the most impolitic, and the most unpatriotic thing he did 
during his Administration. I know many Democrats stood by 
him in Congress then, and some of them who are here to-day no 
doubt take the stand they do because they dislike to stultify their 
records. I said then, and I say now, that it was a mistake, a sad 
political mistake, when a Democratic Executive ordered the Stars 
and Stripes that floated over Hawaii hauled down, and sought in 
every way to overturn the provisional government and restore the 
disgraced and degenerate monarchy. [Applause.] 

The American people are not in sympathy with any man who 

hauls down the American flag in favor of monarchy. [Applause. ] 

When the Hawaiian Monarchy collapsed it fell like a rotten tree 

on the bank of a turbulent stream, quickly to be swept away and 

never to be restored. It is not democratic policy to restore a 
3478 



11 

dead monarchy in the place of a live republic on this hemisphere. 
Our sympathies are all with the people, with free institutions; 
they are all against monarchies, and with governments deriving 
their just powers from the consent of the governed. The day is 
not far distant when a monarchical flag will not wave over an 
inch of territory on the Western Hemisphere or on the islands 
adjacent thereto. Jefferson's dream is coming true when this 
Western World, from Baffin's Bay to the Straits of Magellan, will 
be dedicated to freedom and to free institutions. [Applause.] 

Mr. Speaker, the assertion has been made that the annexation 
of the Hawaiian Islands is a departure from the Monroe doctrine. 
I want to controvert that statement. I am as firm a believer in 
the Monroe doctrine as anyone. If I thought for one moment 
that the annexation of these islands was a violation of the Monroe 
doctrine I would abandon annexation and stand by the Monroe 
doctrine. I say the Monroe doctrine has nothing whatever to do 
with this qu estion. The Monroe doctrine precludes foreign powers 
from acquiring additional territory on this hemisphere, but it 
surely does not prevent us from annexing contiguous territory 
essential to our own preservation. To contend otherwise would 
be ridiculous. 

The history of this country is a record of national progress, 
national development, and national expansion. From a child we 
have grown in a little over a century to a giant among the powers 
of the earth. 

The whole history of this country teaches, if it teaches any- 
thing, that it is unwise politically to get in the way of national 
progress. 

Every foot of territory heretofore acquired has been gained in 
the teeth of violent opposition. Yet who would part with any of 
it to-day? The annexation of Alaska, the annexation of the Cali- 
fornias, the annexation of Texas, the annexation of the Floridas, 
and the annexation of Louisiana and the great northwest terri- 
tory by Jefferson, the greatest thing ever done in this country 
since the Revolution , were all bitterly fought and opposed. Every 
purchase, every acquisition, has been more than justified. And 
so, in my judgment, will be this acquisition of the Hawaiian 
Islands. 

Sir, we are making history very fast during these closing years of 

3478 



12 

th^ nineteenth, century — faster than most people imagine. This is 
an era of rapid progress and development. Why should we not 
accept the Hawaiian Islands? There are a thousand reasons why 
we should. I know of not one good valid reason why we should 
not. It is said the sugar trust is opposed to annexation; but that 
opposition should not deter us from doing our duty. It is said 
that some of the great powers do not think kindly of annexation. 
I answer, if that be true, that is the best reason why we should at 
once acquire these islands, and that now not a nation on earth 
can or will dare object. And I proclaim that if we now turn our 
backs on Hawaii and refuse to accept her generous and magnifi- 
cent gift, we will be. and we ought to be, the laughingstock of 
the civilized world. 

Standing here to-day. I voice my own views and my own senti- 
ments. I speak only for my own constituency. But yet, sir, I do 
not hesitate to say that I regret exceedingly that these resolutions 
can not pass this House with the same unanimous voice and vote 
as the resolutions to make Cuba free. On the 1st day of April, 
1893, the American flag was hauled down at Honolulu. Five 
years afterwards, under the same American flag, the booming 
guns of Dewey's battle ships sounded a new note on the Pacific 
shores, a note that has been echoed and reechoed around the 
world, and that note is that we are on the Pacific, that we are 
there to stay, and that we are there to protect our rights, promote 
our interests, and get our share of the trade and commerce of the 
opulent Orient. [Prolonged applause.] 

Yes, sir; in my judgment, if we but use ordinary care and 
watchfulness we are destined to become, in spite of ourselves, the 
richest and the greatest commercial nation the world has • ever 
seen. Look at our past. What may be expected of the future? 
Already most of Europe is jealous and envious of us, and our 
ancient foe, England, now begs an alliance. But we need no al- 
liance with England or any other country. All we need is a firm 
reliance on ourselves. Our mission on earth is a mission of peace. 
We seek no quarrel; neither do we fear one, as haughty Spain has 
learned to her sorrow. [Applause.] 

We are now commercially great, but we must grow and expand 
and become greater. We should strive to extend our trade and 
commerce. We have the men, the climate, the brain, the brawn, 

3178 



13 

and the genius. For one I stand for national progress, national 
development, and national growth. I do not believe nations, anv 
more than individuals, can standstill very long without retrograd- 
ing. The past is secure. We must legislate for the present and 
the future. I have no sympathy with the Bourhonism that never 
forgets and never learns. We must keep abreast of the times and 
be up to date. We must meet each new question as it arises, and 
with a singleness of purpose for the public good decide it for the 
best interests of all the people. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Dalzell). The time of the 
gentleman from New York has expired. 

Mr. SULZER. I should like to have a little more time. 

Mr. HITT. I can yield to the gentleman only ten minutes 
more. I yield to the gentleman ten minutes more, 

Mr. SULZER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his 
courtesy. 

Now, sir, I contend that no gentleman here who has studied 
the situation in Europe, that no gentleman here who has watched 
the march of the European nations into Africa and Asia, can pos- 
sibly misunderstand the drift of the times. 

The great powers of Europe are seeking new markets for their 
manufactured goods. They know that the markets of the world 
control the commercial destiny of nations. We must watch our 
rights and protect our interests in the Pacific. If we do not, I 
believe we will do the commercial interests in this country an 
irreparable injury. Our first step should be to annex Hawaii. 
That is the key to the whole situation. Our next step should be 
to build the Nicaragua Canal, and our third step should be to re- 
build and reestablish our merchant marine. Annex Hawaii, and 
all the others will follow like the day the night. 

Mr. GAINES. Will the gentleman from New York again per- 
mit me to interrupt him? 

Mr. SULZER. Certainly. 

Mr. GAINES. Were you in the Chicago convention? 

Mr. SULZER. Yes; I was a delegate. 

Mr. GAINES. Did you offer any pro-Hawaiian resolution there? 

Mr. SULZER. No; I offered a resolution there for free Cuba, 
and I am glad to say it was adopted. 

Mr. GAINES. Why did you not offer the other? 

3478 



14 

Mr. SULZER. Well, sir, one thing at a time lias always been 
my motto. 

Mr. GAINES. Then let us get through with Cuba, and then 
we will consider this other matter. 

Mr. SULZER. One thing at a time. Sufficient unto the day 
is the duty thereof. Cuba is now free to all intents and purposes, 
and we have this matter before us. I am on record in this House 
and out of it in favor of Cuban independence and Hawaiian an- 
nexation. On several occasions in this House I have spoken 
briefly in favor of Hawaiian annexation. I was for the Cubans 
first. When they got their independence, I was for the Hawaiians. 
I want to see the Haw T aiians also free and happy, and I do not think 
they can be imless, as they say themselves, we take them under 
the protecting folds of the Stars and Stripes. [Applause.] 

Mr. GAINES. Did you bring in a minority report in favor of 
Hawaii or say anything about it in the Chicago convention? 

Mr. SULZER. The Democratic national platform is silent 
about Hawaii. How it was left out I know not. I was not a 
member of the committee on resolutions and platform. Perhaps 
it was omitted out of personal regard for certain distinguished 
Democrats; perhaps not. I can not tell. I do not know. I re- 
spectfully refer the gentleman to my speeches in this House and 
to the record of the proceedings of the last Democratic national 
convention. 1 say now that the time has come when we are 
going to place "Old Glory" once more over the ramparts of the 
Government buildings in Honolulu, never again to be hauled 
down. [Applause.] 

Now, sir, Hawaii is the key to the whole Pacific, and the com- 
mercial value of Hawaii, and its consequent importance to the 
United States, can be very clearly seen from the following study 
of distances from Honolulu: 



Miles. 

Unalaska 2,016 

Ban Krancisco. 2,039 

Marshall Isl an ds 2, 098 

Portland, Oreg 2,200 

Samoa - 2,220 

San Diego. Cal , 2,250 

Victoria, British Columbia 2,300 

Tahiti.. 2,389 

Sitka 2,395 

Caroline Islands 2,602 

Fiji - 2,736 

Yokohama 3,399 

New Caledonia - 3,500 

Kamchatka 3,800 

3178 



Miles. 

New Zealand 8,900 

New Guinea - 4,000 

Nicaragua Canal 4,210 

Sydney, Australia 4, C00 

Panama - 4, 665 

Manila 4,700 

Borneo 4,850 

Hongkong 4,917 

Vladivostock 5,000 

Callao. 5,147 

Singapore 5,780 

Valparaiso 5, 916 

Cape Horn - ._. 0,300 



15 

No one can study these figures carefully and be in doubt as to 
his duty as a patriotic American citizen, having the best interests 
of the whole country at heart. And with the Nicaragua Canal 
built and owned by us the proposition in favor of annexation is 
emphasized beyond successful controversy. 

Now, Mr. Speaker, I desire to say in conclusion, because I ob- 
serve that my time is nearly exhausted, that events are potent and 
incontrovertible arguments; and recent events, which no man can 
mistake or misunderstand, demonstrate beyond dispute the abso- 
lute necessity of our annexing the Hawaiian Islands now and at 
once in order to more successfully prosecute our war with Spain. 
Those in authority say the annexation of these islands is an im- 
mediate military necessity. For that reason and for the reasons 
I have already expressed, I shall cast my vote for annexation. I 
feel confident of my position, and sincerely believe the future and 
subsequent events will justify the stand I now take. 

I shall cast my vote in favor of the annexation of the Hawaiian 
Islands, because we need them as a naval and military necessity 
now and in the future for the purpose of protecting and defend- 
ing the territory and the commerce which we already own. We 
need the Hawaiian Islands for national defense. They are the 
key to the Pacific, and the only coaling station in the Pacific 
Ocean between the Arctic Ocean and the Equator, between the 
continent of Asia and the coast of North America. Not to annex 
them now would be national folly; to annex them, security, peace, 
and national insurance. [Long applause.] 

[Here the hammer fell.] 
3478 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



019 944 347 1 



